Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy Cohort Study. Report 3: Cost Effectiveness and Lessons for Future Evaluations

Ophthalmology

Volumn 116, Issue 12, 2009, Pages

  Grieve, Richard ^b   Guerriero, Carla ^b   Walker, Jemma ^b   Tomlin, Keith ^b   Langham, Julia ^b   Harding, Simon ^a   Chakravathy, Usha ^c   Carpenter, James ^b   Reeves, Barnaby C ^b  

^a ROYAL LIVERPOOL UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^c QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

VERTEPORFIN;

ARTICLE; CALCULATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST OF ILLNESS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MONEY; PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; RETINA MACULA AGE RELATED DEGENERATION; RETINA NEOVASCULARIZATION; SOCIAL WORK; UNITED KINGDOM; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 70549098352     PISSN: 01616420     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.10.023     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Cruess A.F., Zlateva G., Xu X., et al. Economic burden of bilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration: multi-country observational study. Pharmacoeconomics 26 (2008) 57-73
2. Garattini L., Castelnuovo E., Lanzetta P., et al. Direct medical costs of age-related macular degeneration in Italian hospital ophthalmology departments: a multicenter, prospective 1-year study. Eur J Health Econ 5 (2004) 22-27
3. Greiner R.A. Cost of care for patients with age-related macular degeneration in Switzerland and cost-effectiveness of treatment with verteporfin therapy. Semin Ophthalmol 16 (2001) 218-222
4. Meads C., Salas C., Roberts T., et al. Clinical effectiveness and cost-utility of photodynamic therapy for wet age-related macular degeneration: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 7 (2003) v-vi 1-98
5. Bryan S., Sofaer S., Siegelberg T., and Gold M. Has the time come for cost-effectiveness analysis in US health care?. Health Econ Policy Law 4 (2009) 425-443
6. Brown G.C., Brown M.M., Campanella J., and Beauchamp G.R. The cost-utility of photodynamic therapy in eyes with neovascular macular degeneration-a value-based reappraisal with 5-year data. Am J Ophthalmol 140 (2005) 679-687
7. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal (2008). http://www.Nice.Org.Uk/Aboutnice/Howwework/Devnicetech/Technologyappraisalprocessguides/Guidetothemethodsoftechnologyappraisal.Jsp Accessed October 1, 2009.
8. Gold M.R., Patrick D.L., Torrance G.W., et al. Identifying and Valuing Outcomes. In: Gold M.R., Siegel J.E., Russell L.B., and Weinstein M.C. (Eds). Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine (1996), Oxford University Press, New York 82-134
9. Colquitt J.L., Jones J., Tan S.C., et al. Ranibizumab and pegaptanib for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 12 (2008) iii-iv ix-201
10. Harding S.P., Tomlin K., Reeves B.C., et al., VPDT study group. Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy Cohort study. Report 1: Effectiveness and Factors Influencing Outcomes. Ophthalmology 116 (2009) e1-e8
11. Treatment of Age-related Macular Degeneration with Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study Group. Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration with verteporfin: one-year results of 2 randomized clinical trials-TAP report 1. Arch Ophthalmol 117 (1999) 1329-1345
12. Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration with Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study Group. Verteporfin therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in patients with age-related macular degeneration: additional information regarding baseline lesion composition's impact on vision outcomes. TAP report no. 3. Arch Ophthalmol 120 (2002) 1443-1454
13. Brown G.C., Sharma S., Brown M.M., and Kistler J. Utility values and age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol 118 (2000) 47-51
14. Reeves B.C., Langham J., Walker J., et al., VPDT study group. Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy Cohort Study. Report 2: Clinical measures of vision and health-related quality of life. Ophthalmology 116 (2009) 2463-2470
15. Meads C., and Hyde C. What is the cost of blindness?. Br J Ophthalmol 87 (2003) 1201-1204
16. Wright S.E., Keeffe J.E., and Thies L.S. Direct costs of blindness in Australia. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 28 (2000) 140-142
17. Treatment of Age-Related Macular Degeneration with Photodynamic Therapy (TAP) Study Group. Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration with verteporfin: two-year results of 2 randomized clinical trials: TAP report 2. Arch Ophthalmol 119 (2001) 198-207
18. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Macular Degeneration (age-related)- photodynamic therapy. The clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of photodynamic therapy for age-related macular degeneration. September, Technology Appraisals 68 (2003). http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/68_PDTGuidance.pdf Accessed October 1, 2009
19. Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary. No. 57 (2009), British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, London 599
20. NHS Reference Costs 2002. Appendix 1E. National Schedule of Reference Costs: NHS Trust Outpatient HRG Data. Ophthalmology HRG Label (2002), Department of Health, London 136
21. Curtis L. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care (2008), Personal Social Service Research Unit, University of Kent, Canterbury 35-178
22. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 4. PPP and Exchange Rates. http://Stats.Oecd.Org/Wbos/Index.Aspx?Datasetcode=Sna_Table4 Accessed October 1, 2009
23. Mullahy J. Much ado about two: reconsidering retransformation and the two-part model in health econometrics. J Health Econ 17 (1998) 247-281
24. Doubilet P., Begg C.B., Weinstein M.C., et al. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation: a practical approach. Med Decis Making 5 (1985) 157-177
25. Smith D.H., Fenn P., and Drummond M. Cost effectiveness of photodynamic therapy with verteporfin for age related macular degeneration: the UK case. Br J Ophthalmol 88 (2004) 1107-1112
26. Sharma S., Brown G.C., Brown M.M., et al. The cost-effectiveness of photodynamic therapy for fellow eyes with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 108 (2001) 2051-2059
27. Fletcher E.C., Lade R.J., Adewoyin T., and Chong N.V. Computerized model of cost-utility analysis for treatment of age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 115 (2008) 2192-2198
28. Coleman A.L., and Yu F. Eye-related Medicare costs for patients with age-related macular degeneration from 1995 to 1999. Ophthalmology 115 (2008) 18-25
29. Smiddy W.E. Relative cost of a line of vision in age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 114 (2007) 847-854
30. Birchall W. Minimising the impact of visual impairment: training in use of low vision aids is important [letter]. BMJ 319 (1999) 707
31. Margrain T.H. Minimising the impact of visual impairment: low vision aids are a simple way of alleviating impairment. BMJ 318 (1999) 1504
32. Hernandez-Pastor L.J., Ortega A., Garcia-Layana A., and Giraldez J. Cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab compared with photodynamic treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Clin Ther 30 (2008) 2436-2451
33. Stein J.D., Brown M.M., Brown G.C., et al. Quality of life with macular degeneration: perceptions of patients, clinicians, and community members. Br J Ophthalmol 87 (2003) 8-12
34. Browne J., Jamieson L., Lewsey J., et al. Patient Reported Outcome Measures (Proms) in elective surgery: report to the Department of Health. http://www.lshtm.ac.uk/hsru/research/PROMs-Report-12-Dec-07.pdf Accessed October 8, 2009
35. Deeks J.J., Dinnes J., D'Amico R., et al., International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group, European Carotid Surgery Trial Collaborative Group. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 7 (2003) iii-x 1-173